DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
While a product-by-process claim is generally considered an acceptable manner to describe a claimed product, claims 1-8 are phrased such a way that it is unclear whether the claims are directed to a product or a process of manufacturing a product. Since dependent claims 2-8 further limit the process of manufacturing the product in claim 1, the claims are presumed to be directed to the process for the purpose of this Office action.
In order to overcome this rejection, the claims may be amended to clearly show they are drawn to the process. For example:
“A method for fabricating a microchannel matrix optical waveguide plate, being formed by stacking two optical element groups perpendicularly, each of the optical element groups being composed of a plurality of parallel-arranged optical elements, each of the optical elements comprising a glass substrate, the glass substrate being divided into an air surface and a reflecting surface, a first metal film layer, a magnetic material film layer and a second metal film layer being sequentially arranged on the air surface,
S1:…
S2:…”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
While CN112858253 discloses a method of using magnetron sputtering to from reflective films on a waveguide, prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a method comprising the steps recited in claim 1 as a whole including detailed ranges of various dimensions, which are considered nonobvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art absent undue experimentations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. It is noted that the physical, structural limitations of the product as claimed are disclosed in CN110058334A patent publication.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLIE PENG whose telephone number is (571)272-2177. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 6PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hollweg can be reached at (571)270-1739. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHARLIE Y PENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights